IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jcsosc/v1y2018i1d10.1007_s42001-017-0002-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

From neuroscience to computer science: a topical approach on Twitter

Author

Listed:
  • C. A. Piña-García

    (Universidad Veracruzana
    Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México)

  • J. Mario Siqueiros-García

    (Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México)

  • E. Robles-Belmont

    (Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México)

  • Gustavo Carreón

    (Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México)

  • Carlos Gershenson

    (Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
    Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
    Massachusetts Institute of Technology
    ITMO University)

  • Julio Amador Díaz López

    (Imperial College London)

Abstract

Twitter is perhaps the most influential microblogging service, with 271 million regular users producing approximately 500 million tweets per day. Previous studies of tweets discussing scientific topics are limited to local surveys or may not be representative geographically. This indicates a need to harvest and analyse tweets with the aim of understanding the level of dissemination of science related topics worldwide. In this study, we use Twitter as case of study and explore the hypothesis of science popularization via the social stream. We present and discuss tweets related to popular science around the world using eleven keywords. We analyze a sample of 306,163 tweets posted by 91,557 users with the aim of identifying tweets and those categories formed around temporally similar topics. We systematically examined the data to track and analyze the online activity around users tweeting about popular science. In addition, we identify locations of high Twitter activity that occur in several places around the world. We also examine which sources (mobile devices, apps, and other social networks) are used to share popular science related links. Furthermore, this study provides insights into the geographic density of popular science tweets worldwide. We show that emergent topics related to popular science are important because they could help to explore how science becomes of public interest. The study also offers some important insights for studying the type of scientific content that users are more likely to tweet.

Suggested Citation

  • C. A. Piña-García & J. Mario Siqueiros-García & E. Robles-Belmont & Gustavo Carreón & Carlos Gershenson & Julio Amador Díaz López, 2018. "From neuroscience to computer science: a topical approach on Twitter," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 187-208, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jcsosc:v:1:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s42001-017-0002-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s42001-017-0002-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s42001-017-0002-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s42001-017-0002-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David G Serfass & Ryne A Sherman, 2015. "Situations in 140 Characters: Assessing Real-World Situations on Twitter," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(11), pages 1-19, November.
    2. Xin Shuai & Alberto Pepe & Johan Bollen, 2012. "How the Scientific Community Reacts to Newly Submitted Preprints: Article Downloads, Twitter Mentions, and Citations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(11), pages 1-8, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. J. Manuel Pérez-Verdejo & C. A. Piña-García & Mario Miguel Ojeda & A. Rivera-Lara & L. Méndez-Morales, 2021. "The rhythm of Mexico: an exploratory data analysis of Spotify’s top 50," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 147-161, May.
    2. Anna Ruelens, 2022. "Analyzing user-generated content using natural language processing: a case study of public satisfaction with healthcare systems," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 731-749, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Beatriz Barros & Ana Fernández-Zubieta & Raul Fidalgo-Merino & Francisco Triguero, 2018. "Scientific knowledge percolation process and social impact: A case study on the biotechnology and microbiology perceptions on Twitter," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(6), pages 804-814.
    2. Wang, Zhiqi & Chen, Yue & Glänzel, Wolfgang, 2020. "Preprints as accelerator of scholarly communication: An empirical analysis in Mathematics," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4).
    3. Ortega, José Luis, 2018. "The life cycle of altmetric impact: A longitudinal study of six metrics from PlumX," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 579-589.
    4. Mike Thelwall, 2021. "Measuring Societal Impacts Of Research With Altmetrics? Common Problems And Mistakes," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(5), pages 1302-1314, December.
    5. Xu, Fang & Ou, Guiyan & Ma, Tingcan & Wang, Xianwen, 2021. "The consistency of impact of preprints and their journal publications," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2).
    6. Victoria Tur-Viñes & Jesús Segarra-Saavedra & Tatiana Hidalgo-Marí, 2018. "Use of Twitter in Spanish Communication Journals," Publications, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-10, July.
    7. Beibei Hu & Xianlei Dong & Chenwei Zhang & Timothy D. Bowman & Ying Ding & Staša Milojević & Chaoqun Ni & Erjia Yan & Vincent Larivière, 2015. "A lead-lag analysis of the topic evolution patterns for preprints and publications," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(12), pages 2643-2656, December.
    8. Grover, Purva & Kar, Arpan Kumar & Dwivedi, Yogesh K. & Janssen, Marijn, 2019. "Polarization and acculturation in US Election 2016 outcomes – Can twitter analytics predict changes in voting preferences," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 438-460.
    9. Liwen Vaughan, 2016. "Uncovering information from social media hyperlinks: An investigation of twitter," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 67(5), pages 1105-1120, May.
    10. Mojisola Erdt & Aarthy Nagarajan & Sei-Ching Joanna Sin & Yin-Leng Theng, 2016. "Altmetrics: an analysis of the state-of-the-art in measuring research impact on social media," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 1117-1166, November.
    11. Zhiqi Wang & Wolfgang Glänzel & Yue Chen, 2020. "The impact of preprints in Library and Information Science: an analysis of citations, usage and social attention indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(2), pages 1403-1423, November.
    12. Jianhua Hou & Hao Li & Yang Zhang, 2020. "Identifying the princes base on Altmetrics: An awakening mechanism of sleeping beauties from the perspective of social media," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-28, November.
    13. Zohreh Zahedi & Rodrigo Costas & Paul Wouters, 2014. "How well developed are altmetrics? A cross-disciplinary analysis of the presence of ‘alternative metrics’ in scientific publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(2), pages 1491-1513, November.
    14. Nuredini, Kaltrina & Peters, Isabella, 2019. "The presence and issues of altmetrics and citation data from Crossref for working papers with different identifiers from Econstor and RePEc in the discipline of Economic and Business Studies," EconStor Conference Papers 204461, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    15. J. C. F. Winter, 2015. "The relationship between tweets, citations, and article views for PLOS ONE articles," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(2), pages 1773-1779, February.
    16. Qing Cheng & Xin Lu & Zhong Liu & Jincai Huang, 2015. "Mining research trends with anomaly detection models: the case of social computing research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(2), pages 453-469, May.
    17. José Luis Ortega, 2016. "To be or not to be on Twitter, and its relationship with the tweeting and citation of research papers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 1353-1364, November.
    18. Zhichao Fang & Rodrigo Costas & Wencan Tian & Xianwen Wang & Paul Wouters, 2021. "How is science clicked on Twitter? Click metrics for Bitly short links to scientific publications," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(7), pages 918-932, July.
    19. Lutz Bornmann, 2015. "Alternative metrics in scientometrics: a meta-analysis of research into three altmetrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(3), pages 1123-1144, June.
    20. Zhichao Fang & Rodrigo Costas, 2020. "Studying the accumulation velocity of altmetric data tracked by Altmetric.com," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(2), pages 1077-1101, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:jcsosc:v:1:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s42001-017-0002-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.